Nepal Communist Party Leader Jhalanath Khanal Expresses Dissatisfaction Over Disciplinary Actions by Top Leadership

Kathmandu. Nepali Communist Party leader Jhalanath Khanal has expressed dissatisfaction, stating that Coordinator Pushpa Kamal Dahal 'Prachanda' and Co-coordinator Madhav Kumar Nepal have taken disciplinary action against senior leaders against the party's norms and procedures.

The two leaders had taken action against Haribol Gajurel, Kul Prasad KC, Major Rai, Maheshwar Dahal, Dharmanath Sah, Jeevach Sah, and others for supporting rebel candidates in the House of Representatives elections. Expressing his discontent over the action, leader Khanal demanded an emergency meeting to brief on the developments.

Furthermore, Khanal warned that if party decision-making processes cease to be institutionalized, indiscipline will increase, potentially jeopardizing party unity itself. Ratopati interviewed leader Khanal on this matter, asking, 'What is your dissatisfaction and why did you demand an emergency meeting?' The short conversation with leader Khanal is presented below:

• You have demanded an immediate meeting with the party leadership regarding the action taken against leaders including Haribol Gajurel. Why is a meeting necessary at this time when we are about to campaign among the people before the election?

The reason is that our party unified on Kartik 19. Now it is Magh 19, almost three months have passed. Even as three months are about to complete, neither has the Central Committee been fully announced, nor have the party's leading organizations been formed. Major decisions are being made in the party without any organizations being in place. Not only those decisions, but institutional decisions were also not made regarding matters like the selection of candidates for the election.

I have not said the party will split. I have only said that if institutional decisions are not made, indiscipline cannot be prevented.

On top of that, the news of senior leaders being directly disciplined has emerged. Haribol Gajurel is a senior leftist leader. Why was such action taken against a leader like him? What is the reason? What happened in Sindhuli? We, other leaders, have the right to know. But we have been deprived of that right. We only read the news after you publish reports of action being taken. We don't even know what was done, and we have no role in it. This kind of lawlessness without an institutional process was observed. Objecting to this, I humbly requested the coordinator to call an emergency meeting to ensure that such matters are handled institutionally.

• Is your indication that the party might split if the action against leader Haribol Gajurel is not withdrawn or if institutional decisions continue to be ignored?

I have not said the party will split. I have said that if we fail to build the newly formed party based on collective leadership, a functional system, and institutional decision-making, then indiscipline cannot be prevented. If anarchy prevails in any party, if there are no norms and procedures, and if a few individuals dominate, how can the party survive? It simply cannot.

• Isn't it a publicly known fact that leader Haribol Gajurel was disciplined by the party after he acted as a proposer for a rebel candidate running against the official party candidate and ignored the party's directive to withdraw his candidacy?

That is true. But what were the circumstances behind that incident? Why did it happen? What necessity arose for a senior party leader to make a decision contrary to the party's decision? What is the situation in Sindhuli? Should all party leaders not know this? Leadership is not just the coordinator and co-coordinator. They are not elected authorities either. They have only been appointed for now. Such major disciplinary action taken by friends in such a capacity should generally only be carried out by the Central Committee.

I did not form the Central Committee of 2500 members. They formed it too. I was only involved.

• So, the action was taken against the procedure?

If one believes in procedure, a clarification should at least be sought. Where is the demand for clarification? Even when action needs to be taken, there are various stages. We must also be informed about the process and the sequence of events if the situation has reached the point of immediate expulsion without any prior steps.

• You are trying to present the party as large by bringing in leaders. It hasn't been long since the Central Committee of nearly 2500 members was announced. Elections are also approaching. Is it possible for the Central Committee to meet under these circumstances?

If it's not possible or if it's impossible, why was that done? This is not a question for me to answer. I did not form the Central Committee of 2500 members. They formed it too. I was only involved.

• Is your concern that the Nepal Communist Party is now operating solely at the discretion of Prachanda and Madhav, and is beginning to violate norms and procedures?

This is the reality. A party operates based on committee procedures. It involves collective leadership and individual responsibility. This is the basis on which a communist party functions. It is guided by ideological and political principles. Without that, a party cannot survive or operate. This is why I advocate for running the party institutionally and procedurally. There must be established methods and procedures to implement the policies and principles we have put forward. If someone needs to be disciplined, no one can question an action taken following due process. For many other decisions as well, the procedure for making them must be clear.

There is a widespread demand for the reorganization and transformation of the communist movement. It has arisen everywhere. It is crucial for any party leader to deeply understand that sentiment and the necessity of the movement.

• Is your understanding that by accumulating leaders in the name of building a large party, but failing to adopt procedures in party operation, the party is becoming weaker despite appearing large?

A communist party must be robust, sharp, strong, and have a clear ideology, vision, and goal. Only then can it lead the general public, the nation, and the revolution. A party cannot be run by surrounding oneself with a heap of people, regardless of who they are. Therefore, thought must be given to the size and nature of the party committees. How many party members are there? The size of the committees should be formed in proportion to that membership. If the party leadership does not extensively discuss and formulate policy to form committees, it will be difficult to run the party.

• It was said that the CPN was transformed after the People's Movement. But listening to you, it seems the name changed, but the leadership's working style did not change. Is this true?

There is a strong demand for the reorganization and transformation of the communist movement. It has arisen everywhere. It is essential for any party leader to deeply understand that sentiment and the necessity of the movement. If they fail to understand, many difficulties will confront the leadership. The leadership will not be able to overcome those difficulties. In such a situation, they will go down, and there is a danger of pushing the party into a pit as well. Leaders of a dynamic party like ours must pay deep attention to such matters, understand them, and be diligent in running the party.

• Can we hope that the leadership will correct itself as you suggest?

The possibility has not ended. That is why I have made the request and appeal. I am asking them to correct themselves and make the party institutional, strong, robust, and revolutionary.

• What will you do if the two leaders ignore your request for a meeting?

If they absolutely refuse to call one, I will decide what needs to be done at that time.